Also Jerry Reese of the Giants.
I know everybody wants Scott Pioli, but what’s the reason he’s supposed to be leaving New England?
A caller on Mike’d Up just suggested Steve Mariucci for the Jets job. That’s actually a pretty good fit, especially if you want Farve to come back. (The owner very much does.)
To make his own mark and not just be Coach Asshole’s personnel guy. At least that the rumor.
Raheem Morris is pretty much Mike Tomlin/Lovie Smith redux- a defensive backs coach under Dungy/Kiffin who will become somebody’s defensive coordinator for 2009 (probably the Bucs’) and a head coach in 2011 or sooner. Also, black.
That guy who taped other teams’ signals? 
Okay, that was probably a bad idea. I might do the same depending on how my defense was playing, though - were they stopping the other team?
After this year, I’ve given up hating Belichick and I will just kiss his ass for the rest of his career. He makes a mockery of the whole concept of big money free agents- and I’m willing to bet he can plug in another personnel guy to replace Pioli just as he plugs in players and coordinators.
The 3-11 Seahawks had managed to scrape together a whopping 10 points, led by the inimitable Seneca Wallace.
What followed Mangini’s blunder? A three 'n out FG that put the Seahawks up by two scores. Game over.
No one in the thread, but plenty out of the thread.
I said nothing about “angry” or “confrontational” or “in-your-face” types. It is wrong to think that there are only two types of coach: nice guy and bad guy. As you point out, Tom Landry was not an “angry” coach. But he was not a “nice” guy, either. He was exactly what I described: demanding. That is, a person who isn’t “nice,” but rather one who says, “Here is what I want, and if you can’t give it to me, you need to do something else for a living.” Don Shula falls in that category as well.
What does Jon Gruden need to do to get fired? I’m mean the guy is not even nice, he’s a flaming asshole. The team has missed the playoffs in 67% of the seasons he’s coached, and his last two trips to the playoffs we’ve been embarrassed. The guy had a 9-3 start to the season (despite ALMOST losing to Detroit and Kansas City) and then went 0-4 to conclude. Two of those were tough games, one was winnable, and one was a gimme. Including a ten point lead in the fourth quarter.
FIRE GRUDEN NOW! (Feel like there should be a “dot com” in there somewhere)
NFL rules prohibit the Browns from talking to Tom Brady while he’s under contract. 
Please, at least you got a draft and free agency before your first season. Not getting the cozy deal that the Panthers and Jags got does not an “intentionally crippled expansion team” make.
THIS is precisely the sort of silly sentiment that needs to be exorcised from the NFL. There is absolutely nothing wrong with a team going 9 - 7. Indeed, it beats the hell out of a team going 7 - 9. Because at least the 9 - 7 team had a shot at the playoffs (many years, that’s enough to get in), but the 7 - 9 team never has a chance.
There are very few coaches at any point in time in the league who have the ability to produce consistent playoff appearances any more. Remember, only 6 out of 16 teams make the playoffs in each conference. It’s not like there are oodles of slots available. If you were to ask the Cleveland Browns, the Cincinnati Bengals, the Arizona Cardinals, the Detroit Lions, the etc. etc. if the would like to have a shot at the playoffs 4 out of 7 years, I’m sure each would say, “sign us up!!”
Now, if you want to offer a criticism of Jon Gruden that has some traction, ask why it is that he tosses up the odd 4 - 12 season? Those are much more damning than a 9 - 7 season.
Indeed, the Oakland Raiders probably should never have let Jon Gruden go. Of course, they likely could not have kept him, since he and Davis didn’t get along, but his results with Tampa Bay have been markedly better than the results others have gotten with Oakland. :eek:
Part of what makes really good franchises really good franchises is that they don’t view coaches as fungible goods. You stick with a coach, even through less than the best result, because that’s what creates stability. You get rid of coaches (or should) for only two reasons:
-
consistently POOR results
-
Incompatibility of the coach with the goals or culture of the team.
Neither of these appear to be true of Gruden and Tampa Bay.
Meh. I can’t get too mad at Gruden for this year’s collapse. The offense started playing pretty damn well; the defense totally fell apart. I don’t know how much of the blame goes to Monte “I’m not gonna be here anymore next month” Kiffin and how much goes to our too-small-to-last-a-whole-season defensive roster, but since Gruden doesn’t generally lay a finger on the defense, it’s not his fault.
Odd, really, because every other year (and the first half of this one) it was invariably the offense letting us down. Gruden could easily have been fired after '06, but not now - especially since he just got a big extension.
That said, Garcia has got to go (his busted-wide-open heroics last week notwithstanding). He is consistently missing wide-open receivers downfield, and we hardly ever have any of those so we’d better get someone back there who can hit them.
I hope they give Luke McCown the starting job next year. I’ll start buying tickets again and everything! Oh, and re-sign Antonio Bryant. It was nice having a #1 wideout at last.
The NFL used the threat of Cleveland luring a weak market team to force cities to build new stadiums to build their team. To milk every last drop out of that, the finalization of the expansion Browns and deciding an ownership team was delayed until a few months before the draft that season. They only had a few months to select a front office, coach, set up facilities, hire a scouting staff, etc. There was almost no time to prepare.
No. In that situation, it’s the percentage play. The average NFL play gains more than two yards.
Kick the field goal and you may never see the football again. Or the other team gets a field goal themselves to put the game out of reach.
Of course the selection of the play is important, too and that certainly is open to criticism. But Mangini made the smart move – it just didn’t work out.
No.
If the play took place outside of easy field goal distance, yes.
But not when the play takes place in a position where the opposition can go three and out and then kick a field goal that forces you to produce two scores to win, not just one.
With three timeouts left, and the stoppage for the two-minute warning, a team is in a good position to get the ball back. By contrast, the median team in the NFL was only 50/50 at making a fourth down attempt. Yes, the short yardage helps, but doesn’t make it a really strong likelihood. Given the significant downside of failing to make the first down, it’s a much better play to kick it away and try for a stop.
It was **very **likely to be the correct play. Smart people have figured this out with math. The Go For It Tables from footballcommentary.com. According to their model, down by 7 on your own 20 with 3:00 to go in the game, you need to expect to make a first down 37% of the time in order to justify going for it.
Really, any study of 4th down strategies by people who know what they’re doing has shown that NFL teams are far too eager to punt. Going for it on 4th & 2 on your own 20 with a score of 0-0 with 57 minutes left in regulation is very nearly a break-even play for most teams. In the specific situation here, going for it is almost mandatory for a coach who’s trying to help his team win instead of trying to avoid criticism.
There’s a significant downside to punting, as well. The difference is that the probability of that downside occurring is near 100%, to say nothing of the possibilities of a block or a good return.
I agree that NFL teams don’t go for it on 4th down nearly enough. I seem to recall a story about a guy writing a book? paper? something about the actual odds and values of various situations relating to that, and a specific reference to Bellichick over others being interested in that sort of thing.
Coaches are too afraid of criticism and fan bases are too results oriented. It’s stupidity by the fans - if a coach makes a gutsy move and it works, he’s a genius, and if it fails, he’s a moron. Well - he makes the decision before we know the result and his decision should be analyzed before, not after.
If the Jets make that 4th down conversion, Mangini probably doesn’t get criticized and yet he made the exact same decision either way.
You’re probably referring to this paper by David Romer: Do Firms Maximise? Evidence From Professional Football
Crennel absolutely deserves a ton of blame for the Browns’ performance this year. For Og’s sake, they had 1 or 2 illegal formation penalties every game. If your offense doesn’t know how to line up properly that’s the coaching staff’s fault.
Other issues: O line regressed this year, ongoing injury/infection issues, poor clock management, no indication that Crennel knew what he was doing in the last 2 minutes of a half, Braylon and Winslow running their mouths all year without playing worth a damn, poor linebacker play and pass rush, Brady Quinn still hasn’t gotten enough reps to give us any confidence in the QB situation next year, and Jamal Lewis might have lost a step.
I was honestly surprised Savage was let go because he did have good drafts and made smart free agent moves (Shaun Rogers was one of the few bright spots), but I hadn’t heard about all the other baloney he was apparently involved in. Whomever they bring in, the Browns really need to strive to maintain some continuity in the front office going forward. Every 3 or 4 years they end up tearing everything down and starting over.
I disagree vehemently.
All the things you are saying would make sense if the ball was at or beyond the 35. Then, you could try and, if you fail, could still hope for a stop and a return of the ball to you with the game in reach.
But failing to make the 4th down where they did guarantees the loss of the game. Over and done. Right there. End of story. No chance to make it up (realistically).
So assuming a 50/50 chance of making the 1st down, you are saying: I’m willing to accept a 50 percent chance of immediate loss of the game, without my team having any chance of getting the ball back, first.
On the other hand, punting the ball away gives your defense a chance to get you the ball back. It may not work. But it leaves the game in reach. So unless the odds of getting the ball back with the game still only 7 points away from a tie are substantially lower after a punt, then going for it is the wrong choice. It’s a gamble that has too great a downside.
To understand the criticism of Gruden, you have to look at what we gave up to get him: Tampa Bay’s 2002 and 2003 first-round draft picks, 2002 and 2004 second-round draft picks, and $8 million in cash. Plus, in essence, Tony Dungy.
Heck, the Glazers fired Tony Dungy in the season after he went to the playoffs.
Gruden’s record from 2002-2008: 57-55, 3 play off appearances, one Super Bowl (with a team he mostly inherited from Dungy), two first round losses, twice 3rd in division, twice fourth. He has never finished second in the conference and never earned a wild card spot.
Dungy’s record from 2002-2008: 84-27, SEVEN straight play off appearances, one Super Bowl win, never finished lower than second in their division.
Okay, maybe not fair, Dungy has Peyton Manning, who plays both offense and defense and makes the occasional special teams appearance. So, in comparison, Dungy took a perpetually pathetic Bucs team, and went 54-42, making the NFC Championship game, making the playoffs four out of six seasons, without much of a quarterback, getting as far as the NFC Championship game where they were eliminated on a questionable call that necessitated a rule change (sound familiar, Raiders’ fans).
I’m not pissed that he went 9-7. I’m pissed he squandered a shot at the playoffs and a first round bye after going 9-3 to start the year. I’m pissed that he’s a jerk, and have been since we got him. I’m pissed that they gave up so much for a guy who is an asshole. I’m pissed that he is inconsistent, overly conservative, has let the defense get old while squandering resources on an offense that has never jelled. That he is star struck with certain QBs, plays head games, chases off good people, etc. I just don’t like the guy and never have. I’d take Dungy back if I had a magic wand even if it meant we NEVER won a Super Bowl. I don’t like Jon Gruden, Sam I Am!